ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

Condonation of Delay\n289\n12.02.2026\nAssessee\nAnil Turakhia\n46, Loha Mandi\nIndore-452001503\nAppeal No\nITA 594/IND/2025\nA.Υ.\n2013-14 (Sec.143(3) r.w.s 254) -Delay 701 days\nMay it please your honours,\n1. The appellant submits that the order of the ld CIT(A) for A.Y. 2013-14 is dated\n09.06.2023. The appellant was required to file appeal

MANOJ KUMAR GANGADHARAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT AND TP) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

House property). That the aforesaid assessment order is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment order”. In the “impugned assessment order” issuance of a penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 270A(1)/ 270A(9)(a) of the Act was contemplated too. 2.2 That as and by way of an order (penalty) passed u/s 270A of the Act i.e. “Misreporting penalty

SHEETAL NATH COLONIZERS,BHOPAL vs. ITO,1(2), BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, BHOPAL

In the result the impugned order is set aside as & by way of

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisheetal Nath Colonizers, Ito 1(2) बनाम/ Plot No.48, M/S Sheetal Nath Bhopal Vs. Colonizers, Near Arya Bhawan, M. P. Nagar Zone Ii Bhopal (Pan: Abzfs4967L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N. D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

houses. Conclusion with facts: I have considered all the facts & circumstance and material related to case available on records as mentioned supra. The assessee has not filed corroborative evidence and explanation for proving source of investment out of advance on sale of flats. There is no nexus between source of investment and advance taken on sale of flats on different

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

Condonation of Delay\nAssessee\nAnil Turakhia\n46, Loha Mandi\nIndore-452001503\nAppeal No\nITA 594/IND/2025\nA.Υ.\n2013-14 (Sec.143(3) r.w.s 254) -Delay 701 days\nMay it please your honours,\n1. The appellant submits that the order of the ld CIT(A) for A.Y. 2013-14 is dated\n09.06.2023. The appellant was required to file appeal by 08.08.2023. Further

KISHORE SEWANI,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(4), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed for statistical\npurposes

house property and income from\nother sources. In the return so filed, the assessee also declared long-term\ncapital gain computed at Rs. Nil from sale of an agricultural land situated\nat Gondermau, Bhopal for Rs.1.25 crore after claiming deduction of cost of\nacquisition, transfer expenses and exemption u/s 54F on the basis of new\ninvestment in a property

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

Condonation of Delay\n289\n12.02.2026\nAssessee\nAnil Turakhia\n46, Loha Mandi\nIndore-452001503\nAppeal No\nITA 594/IND/2025\nA.Υ.\n2013-14 (Sec.143(3) r.w.s 254) -Delay 701 days\nMay it please your honours,\n1. The appellant submits that the order of the ld CIT(A) for A.Y. 2013-14 is dated\n09.06.2023. The appellant was required to file appeal

MANOJ KUMAR GANGADHARAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT AND TP) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

House property). That the\naforesaid assessment order is hereinafter referred to as the\n“impugned assessment order”. In the “impugned assessment\norder" issuance of a penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s.270A(1)/\n270A(9)(a) of the Act was contemplated too.\n2.2 That as and by way of an order (penalty) passed u/s 270A of\nthe Act i.e. “Misreporting penalty

GOVERDHAN LAL YADAV,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(5), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year : 2015-16 Goverdhan Lal Yadav, Ito-3(5) 112/12, Nanda Nagar, Indore बनाम/ Opp. Anoop Takies, Vs. Indore (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Aaypy9432A Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, Ar Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.07.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3. The background facts leading to this appeal are such that the assessee-individual filed return of AY 2015-16 declaring a total income of Rs. Page 3 of 14 Goverdhan Lal Yadav ITA No. 854/Ind/2024- AY: 2015-16 49,130/-. In the return so filed, the assessee declared capital gain from

SHRI BHAWANI SHANKAR PARASHAR,INDORE vs. THE DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

condoned the delay in filing the present appeal. The assessee has raised following grounds: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld Pr. CIT erred in setting-aside the order as passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 by invoking

KISHORE SEWANI,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(1), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi & Kishore Sewani, Ito-1(4) बनाम/ House No.33, Parika Bhopal Vs. Society, Phase-1, Chunabhatti, Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan:Ankps8260M Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.09.2025

house property and income from other sources. In the return so filed, the assessee also declared long-term capital gain computed at Rs. Nil from sale of an agricultural land situated at Gondermau, Bhopal for Rs. 1.25 crore after claiming deduction of cost of acquisition, transfer expenses and exemption u/s 54F on the basis of new investment in a property

NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY ,BHOPAL vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed in terms mentioned above

delay of\n78/74 days is condoned taking into account the explanation given by\nassessee in above application in the light of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs\nMst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387 having settled\nthe law long back that all such technical aspects must make a way for the\ncause of substantial justice.\n4. Brief facts

SHEETAL KAUSHAL,BHOPAL vs. THE ITO 5(2), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member)

House No. 9C, v. ITO-5(2), Indrapuri Raisen Road, Bhopal M.P. Bittan Market, Bhopal, Pin. 462022 M.P. PAN-AQOPK6965C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Smt. Nisha Lahoti, CA Respondent by: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 01.03.2023 Date of pronouncement: 22.03.2023 O R D E R SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed

INDORE PRAGATISHIL SAHAKARI SAKH SANSTHA MARYADIT,INDORE vs. NFAC, DELHI, INDORE

Appeal stand allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2018-19 Indore Pragatishil Income Tax Department, Sahakari Sakh Sanstha Nfa, बनाम/ Maryadit, Delhi Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaaai3124L Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.01.2024

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merit. 4. The assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds: “(1) The Ld. CIT(A) NFAC has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 10,38,997/- being interest received on fixed deposit on the bank as income from other sources. (2) It was proved before

MAHESH KHANDELWAL,INDORE vs. ADDL JCIT (A) -1 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

HOUSE PROPERTY\nगृह संपति से आय\n0\n0\n3\nHEADS OF\nINCOME\nINCOME FROM BUSINESS OR PROFESSION\nव्यवसाय या वृति से लाभ एवं प्राप्तियां\n5,24,683\n7,94,683\n4\nINCOME FROM CAPITAL GAINS\nपूंजीगत प्राप्तियां\n0\n0\n5\nINCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES\nअन्य सूत्रों से आय\n3,766\n3,766\n6\nINTRA HEAD ADJUSTMENTS\nNA\n0\n7\nGROSS

BHARAT JAROLI,NEEMUCH vs. PR. CIT UJJAIN, UJJAIN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Bharat Jaroli, Pr. Cit, B.No. 45, 1, Kila Road, Ujjain बनाम/ Mahaveer Bagh, Vs. Neemuch (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aanpj5994K Assessee By Shri Anil Khandelwal, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.02.2024

delay may kindly be condoned considering the explanation attached. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. Pr. CIT erred in law in assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act on facts contrary to the records of assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2014- 15. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

NEMICHAND JAIN,KALANI NAGAR, INDORE vs. ITO 4(1), AAYAKAR BHAWAN

The appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Udayan Das Guptaassessment Year:2017-18 Nemichand Jain Ito 4(1) 2, Airport Road, Indore बनाम/ Kalani Nagar Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abjpj8164A Assessee By Shri Pankaj Mogra, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.01.2025

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 3. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in the memorandum of appeal are as follows: “1.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,16,000/- made

SHRI KAMLESH PUROHIT,KARAMDI vs. ITO, RATLAM

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Kamlesh Purohit, L/H & Ito S/O Late Ramsingh Purohit, Ratlam Vs. 89/1, Village Karamdi, Ratlam (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bbbpp5709A Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 04.07.2024 O R D E R

delay of 107 days and the same is condoned. 2 Kamlesh Purohit 4. The assesse has raised following grounds of appeal: “1.That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of Id.ITO-1, Ratlam, who computed the capital gains on sale of agricultural land without deducting the indexed

LALJIPAL,BHOPAL vs. WARD-5(3) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2014-15 Laljipal, The Income-Tax Officer, Ward 65, House No.75, Ward 5(3), Vidisha Road, Bhopal बनाम/ Gram Khejda Bramad, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Asqpp7836B Assessee By Ms. Nisha Lahoti, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 11.10.2024

House No.75, Ward 5(3), Vidisha Road, Bhopal बनाम/ Gram Khejda Bramad, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN: ASQPP7836B Assessee by Ms. Nisha Lahoti, CA Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement 11.10.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 06.12.2023 passed by learned Commissioner